Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by manco, Sep 10, 2019.
They put on suits and went for commercial success and got it. They sold very well.
No, if you listen to each record they put out by release date, whatever they ended up doing was a symptom of what they did before, maybe Abacab and The Lamb being the only two which defied expectations
I don't know mate ... I love The White Album, Abbey Road and Let It Be, but it is moving backwards somewhat from Magical Mystery, Pepper and Revolver ...
Not that I am sure why the Beatles came up anyhow lol ... whoops shf lol
HAHA! I agree. One thing that is a bit odd, though, is that I was never fond of "Mama", even though it became a big hit.
That is something I noticed about their stuff too. It got to the point where I was looking for that "long song" I liked them all.
I loved it. It was so menacing and at the time weird. It really worked for me ...
That was another thing about the thread. It was intriguing how varied people's opinions on just about everything were.
In one of the documentaries about them, they talk about the "ha ha, ha...ooowww" part of the song. It was something about scaring his daughter with that "laugh" or something. And, of course, the flashlight on his face from below. He did that in the concerts too.
They just moved towards a style that was more accessible and more within their limitations as a 3 piece band. With Mike Rutherford's limited skills as a lead guitarist, creating another "Firth Of Fifth", "The Musical Box", "Fly On The Windshield" or "Eleventh Earl Of Mar" wasn't an option. Also, they're certainly not the only prog rock band who moved into a simpler direction after the 70s. Rush, the Moody Blues, Yes, Roxy Music, John Wetton, Carl Palmer and Steve Howe in Asia, they all made a similar move towards a more pop oriented sound. Genesis were just more succesful doing so, but that doesn't make them a sellout. I don't like some of the band's later albums (And Then There Were Three, Abacab, Genesis, Calling All Stations), but that's because the songwriting is a lot more uneven, not because it's not prog rock.
Why would this mean anything, insofar as Genesis selling out or not? That just means that maybe any/all of those artists are also candidates for selling out.
I don't agree that there's any consensus.
Yep - if people are still arguing, then there is no consensus!
Well put, I agree.
I haven't listened to enough Gabriel Era Genesis to come to a decent decision but I really love the Collins Era, the songs had a good mix of rock, pop, synths etc. I only own original cd copies of Genesis, Invisible Touch and I Can't Dance and love them back to back. I have only delved into a few Classic Genesis tracks, still good but I think in this case is safe to say that the 80's warranted all new sounds and song writing. Sold Out? Sold Out to the times, it was only logical to take the 80's leap.
Well, as long as 97% of us agree, that makes it a consensus.
Of course, it might be that all we agree on is that Genesis changed their sound to some degree over the years.
Yea they did it on the Invisible touch tour, it was quite effective with the sick green lights and everything
We Can’t Dance is very much a latter day prog album.
I think it’s the 90’s Duke.
This has been debated often in other Genesis threads.
"Sell out" implies a band doing something they would rather not do mainly for the purpose of increasing profits.
In that regard, Collins and Rutherford did not truly sell out. They have continued to do pop-oriented stuff to these days even when nobody was paying attention. I think both simply got a little bored with the prog stuff.
In the case of Banks (no pun intended), the "sell out" accusation might have a little more merit, as he has gone on to record classical music stuff. It is a little less clear (at least to me) that he truly enjoyed doing lighter, simpler stuff. But I have no final opinion on the matter.
In any event, I think it is normal for musicians to want to try new things and that's what Genesis has done for most of their career.
As I'm sure I mentioned in the Genesis album-by-album thread, I actually like WCD, especially when I cut out 4-5 of the songs that I don't like. I get what still would be a full LP-length album with all stuff that I like on it. I never had a problem with Genesis becoming a hit-oriented band, because IMO often they were good at it, and I don't dislike that kind of music. But when they weren't good at it, it wasn't like the prog days, when a good keyboard solo or instrumental passage or interesting textural contrast could rescue an otherwise mediocre song from being skipped. Tell Me Why or Way of the World, for example, have nothing to offer other than their immediate impact, so if one is turned off by them at the start, there are no dimensions or details that could rescue them.
The Lamb followed on with what came before, too.
Abacab was the head scratcher. It laid the groundwork for everything after, but was far removed from Duke.
fair enough...they must have a good day job. ; )
I hear The Lamb as being quite a departure from SEBTP. It's almost an "oddball" item in the Genesis catalog, in that it has a style and sound that isn't shared by another album (it and ATTWT share this distinction, IMO). I see Duke and Abacab having a number of similarities, albeit only with certain songs. IMO, Turn it On Again, Misunderstanding and the Duke suite could have been on either album. Paperlate dates itself to Abacab sessions because of the horns, but IMO it could have been Duke-era, too.
Tony's an interesting one. He takes satisfaction in writing more interesting harmonic pop/prog stuff and now has three orchestral records, but the thing that he seems to have most desired thought his career is chart success. He is on record as being annoyed that a successful solo career didn't materialize and that the band fell off the charts at the end. They all wanted successful singles, but there was a certain hunger for it in Banks oddly. Like he wanted to prove himself. The bands he most commonly cites as influences are decidedly pop (albeit very good and clever pop) bands. I've never quite understood how these two sides of his songwriting successfully coexist. Rachmaninov and the Kinks. Ravel and the Beach Boys.
Looks like one to me. Rejoice, it's hard to come by.
I'll give you Misunderstanding. Heck, I will GIVE YOU Misunderstanding. I've always disliked it, since the first time I heard it, on the day it was released. That song definitely points the way forward. And, yeah, Turn it on Again probably would sound fine on Abacab. I would argue that the Duke suite is still firmly planted in the earlier era, however, even if it's a little less gentile.
I might take the stuff I like from WCD and Invisible Touch and make a CD/playlist out of it. The album thread showed me that I was wrong to dismiss both based solely on the hits, and I actually like a couple of the hits. I just never bought either album.
Separate names with a comma.